Reducing the Cost of Enteral Feeding

Hay, JW; Moonsawmy, C; Barber, Beth

doi:10.1097/00001610-199601000-00007

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ten articles met criteria for inclusion 15–23 (Figure 1). The included studies can be described as those that studied the effectiveness of various cleaning methods on the decontamination of ETF reservoirs and/or giving sets, 15–17,21,22,24 those that reported clinical outcomes and/or microbial counts associated with extending the clinical usage time of feed reservoirs and giving sets following cleaning, 18,23 or those that used a combination of both approaches 19,20 . All studies provided nutrition via decanting feed products into feed reservoirs for delivery via pump or gravity‐drip methods.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the 556 abstracts identified and screened, 26 full-text articles were reviewed. Ten articles met criteria for inclusion [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] (Figure 1). The included studies can be described as those that studied the effectiveness of various cleaning methods on the decontamination of ETF reservoirs and/or giving sets, [15][16][17]21,22,24 those that reported clinical outcomes and/or…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…microbial counts associated with extending the clinical usage time of feed reservoirs and giving sets following cleaning, 18,23 or those that used a combination of both approaches. 19,20 All studies provided nutrition via decanting feed products into feed reservoirs for delivery via pump or gravity-drip methods.…”

Section: Methods Of Decontamination To Facilitate Extended Reuse Of Bottles For Decanted Feeds And/or Administration Setsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…No studies described the cleaning or microbial counts of syringes used for providing syringe boluses or of equipment used for water infusions or flushes. The 3 studies investigating changes in clinical outcomes with extension of equipment use from 24 to 48 or 72 hours all described water rinses as their decontamination method and unanimously reported no adverse clinical outcomes associated with the change to practice over the study period, irrespective of the clinical outcome described 18,19,23 (Table 1).…”

Section: Methods Of Decontamination To Facilitate Extended Reuse Of Bottles For Decanted Feeds And/or Administration Setsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Revisiting the Evidence for the Reuse of Enteral Feeding Equipment in Ambulatory Patients: A Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The reuse of enteral tube feeding (ETF) equipment is not recommended due to the risk of microbial contamination and subsequent risk of infection; however, this practice continues in many ambulatory settings. A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to review the evidence underpinning the cleaning and reuse of ETF equipment. Methods Studies that investigated the reuse, decontamination, and/or cleaning of ETF equipment were considered for inclusion. Electronic databases were searched (no limits were placed on date of publication, age, or duration of reuse). Extracted data were assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses recommendations. Results Ten studies met inclusion criteria: 3 investigated changes to clinical outcomes with extending reuse from 24 to ≤72 hours using water rinses; 5 considered the efficacy of various cleaning methods assessed in laboratory conditions; 2 used a combination of both approaches. Sufficient data to allow GRADE assessment was found only for bottle‐type containers. Conclusions A very low level of evidence supports the cleaning and reuse of rigid and "unspecified" bottle containers; no studies were found to inform the reuse of syringes used for bolus feeding or any equipment used for water infusion or flushes. There is an absence of literature evaluating the safety and clinical outcomes of cleaning and reusing ETF equipment, and research is required to support equipment reuse.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methods Of Decontamination To Facilitate Extended Reuse Of Bottles For Decanted Feeds And/or Administration Setsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methods Of Decontamination To Facilitate Extended Reuse Of Bottles For Decanted Feeds And/or Administration Setsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Revisiting the Evidence for the Reuse of Enteral Feeding Equipment in Ambulatory Patients: A Systematic Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Group II: Financial Measures in Cost Savings—Outcomes Studies: Enteral Devices

Meddles¹,

Cockram²,

Jewell³

et al. 1998

Nutr Clin Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of health care today is to deliver quality patient care while minimizing costs across the continuum of care. In medical nutrition therapy, this involves the prevention of nutritionally related complications and morbidities through acute, chronic, and terminal care. With a population that is growing older and living longer and with advanced technology, patients receiving enteral nutrition support are seen more frequently. 1 It is critical to substantiate efficacy and cost savings through outcome studies for choices made regarding enteral nutrition. How to measure the cost savings, specifically with enteral devices, was the challenge of this discussion group.Data are lacking to measure the cost impact of enteral nutrition throughout the gamut of sites of service delivery settings, ranging from outpatient diagnosis of malnutrition through acute care (emergency room, intensive care unit, and subacute settings), long-term care, home care, chronic ambulatory care, and palliative terminal care. Each setting presents unique challenges in the documentation of cost-benefit ratios. Certain questions need to be answered to determine cost-savings opportunities. These questions need to be evaluated in the following order in all care delivery settings: • What are we doing now? Why? Is it related to an outcome?

show abstract